If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

#1 Priority this Year = Trade Nate Robinson

Nate is an undersized NBA player with big heart. Nate has reached his apex and every summer he calms down to distribute the ball and once the season starts he cannot control his emotions.

Nate doesn't listen to instruction well and will not enjoy playing only 12 minutes a game. His speed & strength can only diminish from here on out and without his athethic abilities he is not a good player.

Does he have a year or 2 left in his body? Sure, but it would make more more sense to package him out to a team that wants a boost and for the Knicks to rebuild the backcourt.

2010 should bring in a 2 guard. Nate can't shoot consistently like a derek fisher, nor can he can't the ball like Tony Parker. This leaves take as the first 5 ft 8 tweener.

I really was that dissappointed with missing out with Sessions because he isn't that great. Sure our team needs good guard play, but we don't want to waste dollars right now.

Nate will be moved, if not, he won't be a Knick next season.

Sure, we would all like to trade for a big name player, or move Curry/Jefferies contract, but reasonably we need to use Nate as the bargain chip while we have a chance.

WE would all like Lee to stay and we will try to keep him but Nate we can do without, especially after we got everything we could out of Nate already.

Nate is an undersized NBA player with big heart. Nate has reached his apex and every summer he calms down to distribute the ball and once the season starts he cannot control his emotions.

Nate doesn't listen to instruction well and will not enjoy playing only 12 minutes a game. His speed & strength can only diminish from here on out and without his athethic abilities he is not a good player.

Does he have a year or 2 left in his body? Sure, but it would make more more sense to package him out to a team that wants a boost and for the Knicks to rebuild the backcourt.

2010 should bring in a 2 guard. Nate can't shoot consistently like a derek fisher, nor can he can't the ball like Tony Parker. This leaves take as the first 5 ft 8 tweener.

I really was that dissappointed with missing out with Sessions because he isn't that great. Sure our team needs good guard play, but we don't want to waste dollars right now.

Nate will be moved, if not, he won't be a Knick next season.

Sure, we would all like to trade for a big name player, or move Curry/Jefferies contract, but reasonably we need to use Nate as the bargain chip while we have a chance.

WE would all like Lee to stay and we will try to keep him but Nate we can do without, especially after we got everything we could out of Nate already.

peace.

rt

What the hell are you talking about

Nate robinson is an elite level athlete.
A man of his athletic ability and physical build does not begin to fade in his 5th season physically. He has no nagging injuries, and just came off a career year, where he not only jumped over dwight howards back but was up for the 6th man of the year award competing with players like jason terry who could start on any team in the league. Now while I feel that his height effects his game and yes his attitude is inconsistent, the fact that your saying he is at the peak of his game is ridiculous and you have only nonsensical opinions to stand on. Nate will continue to get better mainly because he has all the ability in the world and loves the game of basketball, and is probably top 5 in the league as far as athleticism is concerned. There were so many games last season the knicks were either out of, or on the verge of blowing that nate would take over down the stretch and hit big shot after big shot. At no point on any time in this league will he ever average 12 minutes a game not for the knicks, not even if he came off the bench for the lakers or celtics. He can put the ball in the basket, and causes havoc for any opposing defense. When he puts his mind to it, he is a sure handed defender himself who just tapped into his true potential last year, and will continue to improve being that he is only 25. If there is a legitimate player that we can trade him for I am all for it, but if he is willing ( like he seems to have hinted) that he will not ask for an incredible amount of cash to remain a knick for his career, than affordability plus productivity I am all for keeping him around for many years to come. Not many bench players put up his numbers..

in fact almost none.

The thing I love the most about our team, is we don't ever seem afraid

Nate is an undersized NBA player with big heart. Nate has reached his apex and every summer he calms down to distribute the ball and once the season starts he cannot control his emotions.

Nate doesn't listen to instruction well and will not enjoy playing only 12 minutes a game. His speed & strength can only diminish from here on out and without his athethic abilities he is not a good player.

Does he have a year or 2 left in his body? Sure, but it would make more more sense to package him out to a team that wants a boost and for the Knicks to rebuild the backcourt.

2010 should bring in a 2 guard. Nate can't shoot consistently like a derek fisher, nor can he can't the ball like Tony Parker. This leaves take as the first 5 ft 8 tweener.

I really was that dissappointed with missing out with Sessions because he isn't that great. Sure our team needs good guard play, but we don't want to waste dollars right now.

Nate will be moved, if not, he won't be a Knick next season.

Sure, we would all like to trade for a big name player, or move Curry/Jefferies contract, but reasonably we need to use Nate as the bargain chip while we have a chance.

WE would all like Lee to stay and we will try to keep him but Nate we can do without, especially after we got everything we could out of Nate already.

Honestly, trading Nate is probably our last priority. He's cheap and he's a great scorer. Don't get me wrong, if were able to package him with Curry in a trade for expiring contracts for example, I would do it in a heartbeat. But I don't see any reason to actively try to trade Nate.

i love nate and i want him to remain a knick but i feel Douglass will be a better NBA player and i could see douglass potentially win 6th man he has alot of game and watching him in summer league i saw it .

Seriously though, trading Lee and Nate should be considered. If we sign them, they're 1 year rentals. We can't afford to retain their Bird Rights so we might as well try and get rid of Curry and Jeffries or at least get some young talent for the future.

Seriously though, trading Lee and Nate should be considered. If we sign them, they're 1 year rentals. We can't afford to retain their Bird Rights so we might as well try and get rid of Curry and Jeffries or at least get some young talent for the future.

Sorry to be a pain, I`m new to loving basketball so please forgive my ignorance but what are "bird rights"?

Nate robinson is an elite level athlete.
A man of his athletic ability and physical build does not begin to fade in his 5th season physically. He has no nagging injuries, and just came off a career year, where he not only jumped over dwight howards back but was up for the 6th man of the year award competing with players like jason terry who could start on any team in the league. Now while I feel that his height effects his game and yes his attitude is inconsistent, the fact that your saying he is at the peak of his game is ridiculous and you have only nonsensical opinions to stand on. Nate will continue to get better mainly because he has all the ability in the world and loves the game of basketball, and is probably top 5 in the league as far as athleticism is concerned. There were so many games last season the knicks were either out of, or on the verge of blowing that nate would take over down the stretch and hit big shot after big shot. At no point on any time in this league will he ever average 12 minutes a game not for the knicks, not even if he came off the bench for the lakers or celtics. He can put the ball in the basket, and causes havoc for any opposing defense. When he puts his mind to it, he is a sure handed defender himself who just tapped into his true potential last year, and will continue to improve being that he is only 25. If there is a legitimate player that we can trade him for I am all for it, but if he is willing ( like he seems to have hinted) that he will not ask for an incredible amount of cash to remain a knick for his career, than affordability plus productivity I am all for keeping him around for many years to come. Not many bench players put up his numbers..

in fact almost none.

You talk so adamantly about numbers. Are these the same numbers that made Chris Duhon assist total on par with some of the top point guards in the league? In this system the numbers are inflated and you speak of the many games Nate came off the bench (when we are losing) to help inflate his numbers even more. Our lack of another scoring guard also contributed to Nate's infated numbers. Granted this system is good for him and he will get some steals in transition but that doesn't equal wins. Marbury's numbers were better but he got ran out of town for playing a better version of what Nate Robinson is doing now. Nate won't be cheap after this season and that is the major problem. Comparing him to Jason Terry is a joke. Terry is older and still a much better player. He shoots 32% from 3pt range and for a man with all this atheltic ability he doesn't create shots for others, (only for himself). If we could keep him for cheap, great, but that isn't going to happen. Trade him and try to package a contract ASAP, because if we wait to far into the season no team will give us anything of value back.

Sorry to be a pain, I`m new to loving basketball so please forgive my ignorance but what are "bird rights"?

From wikipedia:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Larry Bird exception

Perhaps the most well-known of the NBA's salary cap exceptions, it is so named because the Boston Celtics were the first team permitted to exceed the salary cap to re-sign one of their own players (in that case, Larry Bird). Free agents who qualify for this exception are called "qualifying veteran free agents" or "Bird Free Agents" in the CBA, and this exception falls under the auspices of the Veteran Free Agent exception. In essence, the Larry Bird exception allows teams to exceed the salary cap to re-sign their own free agents, at an amount up to the maximum salary. To qualify as a Bird free agent, a player must have played three seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. This means a player can obtain "Bird rights" by playing under three one-year contracts, a single contract of at least three years, or any combination thereof. It also means that when a player is traded, his Bird rights are traded with him, and his new team can use the Bird exception to re-sign him. Bird-exception contracts can be up to six years in length.

Essentially it allows a team to resign their players regardless of their cap situation. But it costs money to retain the Bird Rights and eats into our available cap in 2010. If we retain their Bird Rights we won't have enough to go after a max-contract free agent in 2010. So therefore we will forego retaining Lee's and Nate's Bird Rights an let them be unrestricted free agents next year.

It's possible we will sign Lee as an unrestricted free-agent next year but definitely not both Lee and Nate. We will not have enough cap space to do it. But that then leaves us with only 8 players on our roster.

Am I the only one worried about only having 6 players on the roster next year and not enough cap space to build a team? At the start of free agency in 2010, we will only have Curry, Jeffries, Chandler, Gallo, Douglas and Hill on the roster (+ some remaining scrubs = Joe Crawford + our 2010 draft pick).

Best case projections have us having $11 mil remaining after a max-contract. So we sign Lee at $8 mil. That leaves us with $3 mil to sign 1 more free agent (possibly Nate??). So....Curry, Jeffries, Chandler, Gallo, Douglas, Hill, max-contract, Lee and one other free-agent. That's 9 players (with no starting PG). You have to have a minimum of 13 to fill a roster. Any money spent (e.g. mid-level) eats in 2011 cap space.

Am I the only one that sees this as a potential problem or am I wrong?

I like Nate but he is irrelevant!! Nate will NOT control if this team wins or losses. He has energy off the bench and makes a nice change of pace player but he does make poor decisions and he is a selfish player; as well as being a 5' 8" SG!! Nate can help the Knicks by bringing in his energy when the Knicks are just lumbering around. As said in one of the posts, he is an elite athlete in this league... and he is. He is a gifted athlete but I wouldn't say a gifted NBA player! Also, you can see that his game (antics) get's to Mike D some times as it did with Isiah and with Brown... I think Nate is his own worst enemy because every time he walks on the court it's like he has something to prove and it becomes him against the other team and even showing to the viewers that he is some super star. Like Riley used to say "There's no I in Team".